emv0001@jove.acs.unt.edu (Erick Marvi Vermillion-salsbury) wrote:
>
>While in a Houston bar's restroom, my co-worker saw the following
>scrawled on a condom machine:
>
>THIS GUM SUCKS
>
Which is traditionally followed (in someone else's handwriting) by the =
response:
YEAH, BUT IT LASTS FOR AGES
or
BUT IT MAKES REALLY BIG BUBBLES
Actually, given that we now have gum flavoured with mint, fruit or even
chocolate, it's an understandable mistake.
Another traditional warning reads:
MY DAD SAYS THESE THINGS DON'T WORK
In Britain most machines carry the reassurance that the product is
"Electronically tested to BS3704" (yes, there is a British Standard
for condoms. Some people have too much free time.)
This traditionally earns the response:
SO WAS THE HINDENBERG
Having exhausted the possibilities of coloured, flavoured, ribbed,
scented and even striped condoms, manufacturers have started producing
"novelty" condoms. These have numerous bumps and protuberences so that
they resemble sea anemones. However they must violate BS3704 in some way,
since they carry the message "Not to be used as a contaceptive".
What on earth are you supposed to do with them then? I can only assume
children's parties have more interesting balloons than they used to.
(From the "Rest" of RHF)